James Carlson writes:
> Added on top of that is the fact that we've already got thousands of
> unfixed bugs in the database. The only thing a static checker can
> really do is add more bug reports. If we're not reducing the ones
> found by traditional testing to zero, then what's the use in adding
> more to the list?
It's also worth mentioning that we're not yet getting the most that we
can out of lint. In a nightly run with lint enabled, it runs with
just the default 'level' flag. There are two related problems with
that:
- Higher levels do a *lot* more analysis, so we're missing out on
some checks that would be worthwhile, including some fairly
sophisticated flow analysis.
- The actual lint binary that's exec'd is a *different program
entirely* when "-Nlevel" is set. That different program is (as
best I can tell) better-maintained and more modern; the "default"
one is not particularly good.
(That latter one often comes as a bit of a surprise ...)
Before we spend tens or hundreds of kilobucks on new tools, it'd
probably be a good idea to make better use of the free ones we already
have readily available.
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-code mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
